Is it Easier to Shoot Sub MOA Further Out?

Airik Farley

Airik Farley

Private
Minuteman
Mar 27, 2024
17
20
US
#1
I've noticed that it seems easier to shoot sub MOA the further out I move the target. Is that normal, why is that? I understand that 1MOA @ 100y is 1 inch and at 300y it's 3 inches, but I don't feel like that should make it 3x easier since it's 3x as far. My expectations were that the difficultly would scale linearly with distance.

I only have access to a range that goes out to 300 yards but I've noticed that I struggle to shoot sub MOA at 100 yards, I normally average about 1-1.25 MOA at 100 yards. However when I move out to 300 yards I consistently shoot well under 1 MOA. On average I tend to shoot around 0.3 - 0.5 MOA at 300. Tonight I somehow shot a 0.16 MOA 3 round group at 300y with gusting winds which absolutely blows my mind. I doubt I'll ever achieve that again.

I'm shooting with Horney ELD-M 6.5 Creedmoor FYI.


shared_image-18~2.png
 
Last edited:
#2
It should be “harder”, in that there are more variables involved (or more time for the various variables to act on your shot). You may be noticing a positive effect of having less magnification causing apparent movement of the reticle. Same reason some people seem to shoot better if they “zoom out” with their scope. Or, the shooting position might be up or down a little making the angle more comfortable or consistent which is allowing you to be more consistent shot to shot. If the gun is shooting that small at 300, it will shoot that small at 100 but you are doing something different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wind gypsy, JakeM, Taylorbok and 2 others
#3
One of the Litz books has a study on this. Going purely off memory here, I believe they used shoot-thru targets to print the same group at 100 and 300, while arranging it so either a 100 yard or 300 yard aim point could be used. If I recall correctly the result was basically "aim small, miss small" where the groups were tighter at both distances when using the 300 yard aim point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doubloon
#4
I have seen that and most every time its either been a parallax issue, or its a bullet base transition to bearing body vs that rifles crown issue.
Should the transition not be perfect and the crown the same the gas gives the bullet a slight yaw, at the muzzle. Then it takes a few 100's of a second. for rotational spin to counter act that.
Different bullets or sometimes different lot numbers of same cures it or same bullets in another gun. The crown will tell you if its happening as you will see more gas markings on one side than another. However you will need high magnification to see the diff, as the naked eye will not detect it.

edit for fat fingering spelling
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KYAggie, doubloon, XP1K and 1 other person
#9
Has a lot to do with your distance and today’s modern ballistics.
300 yds isn’t the same 300yds it was 60yrs ago
Modern cartridges, powders, brass, projectiles and barrel advancement makes it much easier than our grandfathers had it.
The challenge begins when atmospherics start factoring in. And that increases with distance.
Try to find somewhere where you can shoot
5-600yds. Better yet, 800+ and you’ll see the elements begin to fight you. Not to mention your breathing, heartbeat, thoughts in your brain, etc etc.
 
#10
I shoot a lot at 100, 300, 385, and 650. I've never had a trend to shoot tighter at 300 - 650 than I did at 100.

I wish I could.

As said above, shoot more groups at each distance, average, and please share what you have found out.
 
#13
i have noticed the same thing, i have wonderd if it was not mental. taking more care in fundamentals because the tgt was further away. i have chalked it up to a mystery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ronin22
#18
Just for fun, here's the data of one of my barrel. 20x 5 shots groups at each distances 100, 200 and 656 yards.
I think we can call it significant.
6BR
Average Ex. Spread and average mean radius. All in MOA
100y: 0.73 0.25
200y: 0.62 0.24
656y: 0.74 0.26
 
#21
All other things being equal, swerving motion of the rotationaly stabilized projectiles is usually the most intensive in first 100 yards or so. Once the pitching & yawing phenomena get damped out, the flight regarding centar of mass of the bullet is more closely aproximated by the point-mass trajectory model. Therefore, it's possible to observe increased MOA groups at closer range than further away. However, when decent ammo is fired from accuracy barrels the effect is pretty negligible from practical standpoint ( I'd say less than 1/2 of a caliber up to 100 yards)
 
#22
bulletbluesky said:
All other things being equal, swerving motion of the rotationaly stabilized projectiles is usually the most intensive in first 100 yards or so. Once the pitching & yawing phenomena get damped out, the flight regarding centar of mass of the bullet is more closely aproximated by the point-mass trajectory model. Therefore, it's possible to observe increased MOA groups at closer range than further away. However, when decent ammo is fired from accuracy barrels the effect is pretty negligible from practical standpoint ( I'd say less than 1/2 of a caliber up to 100 yards)
Click to expand...
Impossible. A bullet doesn’t “swerve”. You could be thinking of the yawing of an arrow in flight, but that is still flying on a straight line through the arrows center axis. Even though it is flexing up and down. A bullet can’t do that. Too short and rigid. Also, laws of motion already decided that about an object in motion tends to stay in motion till acted upon by a greater force etc.
 
#25
Gunfighter14e2 said:
Depending many things, high speed footage says otherwise. Everything perfect, no it won't.
Click to expand...
The bullet still travels in a straight line other than the drop from gravity. It might wobble, but that won’t make it travel left then back right. If it leaves the barrel and starts traveling .001 degrees left then it will continue on that path unless a greater force pushes it back the other way. I think sir Isaac newton already figured this out for us. The point of the thread still being whether the op can shoot smaller groups at 300 yards vs 100 yards and as several have said-go shoot 10 round groups at different distances and see what happens.
 
#27
There is, likely, a shooter component to this. You know…

You’re laid out prone at the 100 yard line, the end of your sniper-pro shooting mat fluttering gently in the light (4.3 mph according to the kestrel) breeze. Your position is rock steady. The new $4000 bipod is really paying off. And, the custom made rear bag allows for adjustments that are so small, and so precise, that you can’t even tell you are making them. There’s a small mountain of gleaming brass to your right. All of that ammunition was well spent. Your zero is PERFECT. The crosshairs of your scope are exactly quartering the bullseye. Now is the time. Position? Rock solid. Sight alignment? Square and true. Respiratory pause? Yep. Then, The Voice. “Send it.” Squeeze, bang, freeze. You drill the bull. Marky Mark is just a fuckin’ actor. Cycle the action. “Re-engage.” Frickin’ A, that one caught the edge of the first. “Re-engage!” Clover-leaf? This group is gonna be awesome. “Re-engage, sniper.” Hell yeah, brother. That’s four touching. One more and I’m probably the best rifleman that’s ever lived. “Re-engage!” What. The. Actual. Fuck. No, I called that one. I mean, 1.2 moa is still pretty good. It’s a flyer. Only the first 4 really count. Fucking Hornady!

But, at distances where you can’t see your impacts on paper…

Where’d that one go? Don’t know, send another. Well, now? Fuck if I know. Just shoot 3 more and we’ll check after. Damn, that’s a fine group. I know, right? I wasn’t even really trying. Just put the cross hair on the bull and squeeze.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kalani Laker, Gemsbok, wind gypsy and 2 others
#28
Interesting discussion here.
However, common sense will tell you that at longer distances bullets are being acted upon by outside forces, gravity, wind, spin drift at an increasingly bigger amount over distance.
Can you shoot a .5 moa groups at 300 if you shoot a .5 moa group at 100? Of course it's possible.
But if you're asking can you shoot the same 1/2" group at 300 that you shot at 100? Probably not.
 
#30
Not sure about 300yds , but i was having issues with Berger 77 OTM in my AR not shooting well at 100. Barely 1 MOA at 100. There are a lot of benchrest shooters at my club and they all said to check them at 200, some bullets don't "settle in" till after 100 is what I kept hearing from them. Sure enough 3/4 to 1/2 MOA at 200YD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KYAggie
#31
Interesting discussion. The 270 barrel for my R93 does this and I’ve had it since 2001. If I can get loads to group 1-1.25” at 100 yards, they typically group the exact same, as in 1-1.25” at 200 yards. I never could figure out why, but I apparently I should look at the crown, perhaps it’s causing that strange phenomenon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Braunie1
#32
Here is something to try for fun.
If at 100 yards you are using the maximum magnification on your scope to try to shoot a tiny group, try instead backing your magnification down a bit and see if maybe trying to keep the crosshairs exactly on a spot all zoomed in was making you not be as still as you are at 300 yards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Modoc, LuckyLuke80, Im2bent and 3 others
#33
W54/XM-388 said:
Here is something to try for fun.
If at 100 yards you are using the maximum magnification on your scope to try to shoot a tiny group, try instead backing your magnification down a bit and see if maybe trying to keep the crosshairs exactly on a spot all zoomed in was making you not be as still as you are at 300 yards.
Click to expand...
I have the same problem with my 77 yr old father, he constantly wants to shoot on max magnification. I tell him back it off to 16-18x and you might see better results, but it’s like taking to a wall sometimes.
 
#34
Braunie1 said:
I have the same problem with my 77 yr old father, he constantly wants to shoot on max magnification. I tell him back it off to 16-18x and you might see better results, but it’s like taking to a wall sometimes.
Click to expand...
Listen to your dad. If you are having issues with unsteady crosshairs at high magnification, dialing the scope power back will not solve the issue. It will just obscure the movement. Work on your shooting mechanics and front/rear rests.

Also, bullets don’t self-correct in flight and yield smaller MOA at greater distance. This has been repeatedly discussed and shown to be complete nonscense. Parallax is the likely cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LuckyLuke80
#35
Braunie1 said:
Not sure about 300yds , but i was having issues with Berger 77 OTM in my AR not shooting well at 100. Barely 1 MOA at 100. There are a lot of benchrest shooters at my club and they all said to check them at 200, some bullets don't "settle in" till after 100 is what I kept hearing from them. Sure enough 3/4 to 1/2 MOA at 200YD.
Click to expand...
Bullets don’t go to sleep. They wake the fuck up. How is a bullet going to steer itself back on course if it is asleep? The answer is that it can’t unless it is awake.

No, seriously, how does the bullet know it is off course, by how much, and to where to correct? It can’t. Once a bullet is off course, it is off course and it cannot correct itself.

Marine52 said:
Listen to your dad. If you are having issues with unsteady crosshairs at high magnification, dialing the scope power back will not solve the issue. It will just obscure the movement. Work on your shooting mechanics and front/rear rests.
Click to expand...
Yes, but not seeing those small jerky motions in the optic can allow the shooter to be more relaxed, and to break a clean shot; instead of jerking the trigger as the reticle flies across the intended POA.
 
#36
Marine52 said:
Listen to your dad. If you are having issues with unsteady crosshairs at high magnification, dialing the scope power back will not solve the issue. It will just obscure the movement. Work on your shooting mechanics and front/rear rests.

Also, bullets don’t self-correct in flight and yield smaller MOA at greater distance. This has been repeatedly discussed and shown to be complete nonscense. Parallax is the likely cause.
Click to expand...
For one, He is the one not listing. I not going to listen to a guy that says "Max power is more accurate" I try to tell him to back of the mag some. Also I never said anything about self correcting but could it be stability? Not sure but, I'm sure there is a reason most benchrest shooter use flat base bullets inside 300yds . I'm just giving a small sample to a issue I had.
 
#37
KYAggie said:
Interesting discussion. The 270 barrel for my R93 does this and I’ve had it since 2001. If I can get loads to group 1-1.25” at 100 yards, they typically group the exact same, as in 1-1.25” at 200 yards. I never could figure out why, but I apparently I should look at the crown, perhaps it’s causing that strange phenomenon.
Click to expand...
Interesting observation indeed. If the effect wasn't just a statistical fluke (and you can reproduce it more often than not), you should inform ballistics experts to check more closely what's going on. Shrinkage of groups by 50% MOA couldn't reproduce on regular basis even Franklin W. Mann no matter what he tried
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KYAggie
#38
Gunfighter14e2 said:
I have seen that and most every time its either been a parallax issue, or its a bullet base transition to bearing body vs that rifles crown issue.
Should the transition not be perfect and the crown the same the gas gives the bullet a slight yaw, at the muzzle. Then it takes a few 100's of a second. for rotational spin to counter act that.
Different bullets or sometimes different lot numbers of same cures it or same bullets in another gun. The crown will tell you if its happening as you will see more gas markings on one side than another. However you will need high magnification to see the diff, as the naked eye will not detect it.

edit for fat fingering spelling
Click to expand...
That makes no sense, and it’s wrong. You assert that the bullet somehow corrrects the issue with the crown down range, no way that happens. Litz proved that.
 
#40
tna9001 said:
That makes no sense, and it’s wrong. You assert that the bullet somehow corrrects the issue with the crown down range, no way that happens. Litz proved that.
Click to expand...
Well others have proved it could happen as far back as 1956, so we'll agree to disagree. I don't care what others say, what I see with my own eyes is proof enough to/for me. YMMV
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hickswr
#41
If you record THE SAME GROUP at two different distances, the only way that the further distance will be angularly tighter is through some form of wind/velocity/drag correction. In other words, the right most shot experiences a stronger R->L wind than the rest of the group and the highest shot is also one of the slower from an MV perspective, or the highest shot has higher individual drag than the rest of the group, etc...

Some people claim to be able to make positive compensation happen. I have shot and recorded a LOT of groups and have never seen it with any sort of consistency. It does sometimes happen, and I may be the biggest fucking idiot in the world, but as far as I can tell it's completely random chance.

If you shoot one group, or many groups for that matter, at 100yd and they're 1.5 MOA then you shoot many groups at 300yd and they're 1 MOA then I'd tend to believe you have an aiming or parallax issue. If you have a system that does this it's easy enough to put a 100yd reference sheet of paper above the 300yd target Line of Sight so you catch the same group at both distances. This will tell you if it's divine guidance or if it's aiming error.
 
#43
Gunfighter14e2 said:
Question, why were and are Flat base bullets, the go to for group sizes under 300yds?
Click to expand...


Every feature you form/shape on the bullet has to have it's Cg and center of form along the same axis (center-line of the bullet). Boat tails are added complexity in the forming operation. They may or may not add extra steps in the machine that makes them, but they do add complexity and another feature that has to be kept in line, concentric with the rest of the bullet. So the short answer to your question is that it is easier to make flat base bullets shoot smaller groups (simpler form), and the drag benefits of a boat-tail bullet don't make enough difference at close ranges to warrant the extra work to put another feature on the bullet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Modoc and Braunie1
#44
Ledzep said:
Every feature you form/shape on the bullet has to have it's Cg and center of form along the same axis (center-line of the bullet). Boat tails are added complexity in the forming operation. They may or may not add extra steps in the machine that makes them, but they do add complexity and another feature that has to be kept in line, concentric with the rest of the bullet. So the short answer to your question is that it is easier to make flat base bullets shoot smaller groups (simpler form), and the drag benefits of a boat-tail bullet don't make enough difference at close ranges to warrant the extra work to put another feature on the bullet.
Click to expand...
Correct,...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Shooters accuracy magnum vs short action?
Replies
2
Views
230
tna9001
T
Airik Farley
What Percentile of Shooters Can Shoot 1 MOA?
Replies
125
Views
9K
roostercogburn98
roostercogburn98
T
11 shots for 1.2 MOA at 600 yards with my M14
Replies
8
Views
673
Jsp556
Jsp556
LongIsland
New 22 CZ bolt action scope advice
Replies
3
Views
281
roostercogburn98
roostercogburn98
C
Need Help with Dope
Replies
5
Views
776
Lowlight
Lowlight
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts